Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Traditional rice threshing, which is done mostly in rural areas, was proven to be time-consuming, arduous and a major source of post-harvest losses. This paper aimed to evaluate the performance of a locally developed thresher using MATLAB code for two different varieties of rice, such as Long-grain (FARO) rice and short-grain (TUNTO) rice. The experimental samples of 10 kg, 15 kg, 20 kg, and 25 kg of feed of bundles of paddy were used for both varieties, and the performance index of throughput capacity, threshing efficiency, grain loss and cleaning efficiency was examined with three replications. Threshing efficiency is highest (62.6%) when the feed rate of 10kg is at the third replication for long-grain rice, and grain loss is highest (55.7%) when the feed rate of 25kg is at the third replication for long-grain. Cleaning efficiency for long-grain was 63.3% at a 20 kg feed rate in the third replication; this implies that the lower the feed rate is, the higher the threshing efficiency for long-grain rice, and the higher the feed rate is, the higher the grain loss for long-grain loss. Also, for Tunto rice, the highest threshing efficiency was achieved with the third replication at a 10 kg feed rate, at 54%, and grain loss was highest at 60.8% for Tunto rice with a 25 kg feed rate in the third replication. Cleaning efficiency for Tunto grain rice was also achieved at a 20 kg feed rate at 54%, the highest cleaning output for the Tunto grain rice. These results indicate that threshing efficiency decreases while grain loss increases as the feed rate rises, with cleaning efficiency peaking at an intermediate feed rate of 20kg for both varieties.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zogirma* et al. (2026) studied this question.